Re: [oslc-core] OSLC Core 3.0 - Overiew **PLEASE REVIEW by January 22nd**

[Samuel Padgett <spadgett@us.ibm.com>]

Steve,

Look good. I like that the overview is short and to the point, and I think it's
well stated. Figure 1 really helps.

A few specific comments:

I'm not sure we ever spell out the OSLC acronym. I agree we should use
just OSLC most places, but we should define it somewhere. This seems
like a good place.

> It is recommended that OSLC MS-affiliated TC developed specifications
> depend on OSLC Core 3.0 specifications, though the real goal is to
> minimize dependencies, which may override the need to depend on OSLC
> Core 3.0 specifications.

I was a little confused by this statement. It seems to say one thing and
then something else.

> Every capability or vocabulary term should be linked back to key
> integration scenarios that motivate its need.

I agree. Should we come up with a standard way to do this? I'm not sure
how I can trace a specific capability or vocabulary term back to a
scenario today.

I think we should move the specification outline to a wiki page
specifically for spec authors.

Thanks,
--
Samuel Padgett | IBM Rational | spadgett@us.ibm.com
Eclipse Lyo: Enabling tool integration with OSLC


<oslc-core@lists.oasis-open.org> wrote on 01/08/2015 11:04:51 AM:

> It would be very good to get everyone to review the "OSLC Core 3.0 -
> Overview" draft [1].
>
> It is intended for all audiences: spec writers, those new to OSLC,
> etc.  It is intentionally short too.  It will also serve as the
> "cover letter" (if you will) to all 3.0 capability specs.
>
> I'd appreciate any feedback: missing content needed, clarity in
> areas or even that it has hit the mark and no changes needed.
> Please try to get it to me by January 22nd.
>
> [1]: http://tools.oasis-open.org/version-control/browse/wsvn/oslc-
> core/specs/oslc-core-v3.html
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Steve Speicher
> IBM Rational Software
> OSLC - Lifecycle integration inspired by the web -> http://open-services.net